| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
| Multiple Cluster channels, sanity check. |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| PeterPotkay |
 Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 7:22 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
| jefflowrey wrote: |
| Two app server qms (each on different networks) need to send requests to a single backend server (on one of the networks). |
OK, QM1 and QM2 just make regular SNDR/RCVR channels to FR1, that hosts the single q you need.
| jefflowrey wrote: |
| The reply queues for the apps, have a fixed name, so I can't use QRemotes.... |
That's precisly when you can use predefined remote q defs.
But you don't even need them. Just create a QMAlias on FR1 for QM1 and QM2 that feed the appropriate direct XMITQ, and the reply messages will go back fine without remote q defs for the ReplyQ, regardless of the Reply2Qname.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 7:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
How am I supposed to create two qremotes with the same name on the same qm?
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
OK, so if the Reply Queues on QM1 and QM2 are called ReplyQueue, then we can't have 2 remote q defs on FR1 pointing at them. But we wouldn't want that anyway.
On FR1, create XMITQs called QM1 and QM2. When the replying app on FR1 goes to put a message to ReplyQueue on QM1 or ReplyQueue on QM2, the messages will catch the appropriate XMITQ, and use the corrsponding SNDR channel, that has an IP address for the connname.
This is nice because if some other app decides to talk to the app on FR1 in the future, and its replies need to go to ReplyQueue2, the app on FR1 does not need to change any code. MQ name resolution will allow the replies to go back to the correct reply q on the correct QM.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hguapluas |
| Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 05 Aug 2004
Posts: 105
Location: San Diego
|
Earlier post mentioned using HOSTS files on local machines to facilitate local name resolution and questioned whether this will work.
In short, Yes, it will work. I am having to do this with clustered and distributed connections because I can't rely on DNS working at the different end points. Does this mean more maintenance issues, YES, because the system will use the HOSTS file before it queries DNS so if things do change in the environment, the HOSTS file can become a burden rather than helpful.
Will it work in every case, maybe not.
If you plan on using HOSTS files, use them with due caution and only where absolutely needed. It would be better to get your network folks to keep DNS updated.
Cheers, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
